Is "Cyclone 10 LP" slower than "Cyclone IV E" ?

Thankyou for fast responce ... but,

I made a supplementary test with a FF in an IO pad that is non-DDIO.

so, I found that the speed was virtually the same as shown below.

DEVICE:10CL006YU256C8G (Cyclone 10 LP)

; Slow 1200mV 85C Model Fmax Summary ;

+------------+-----------------+------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------+

; Fmax ; Restricted Fmax ; Clock Name ; Note ;

+------------+-----------------+------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------+

; 656.17 MHz ; 402.09 MHz ; pl|altpll_component|auto_generated|pll1|clk[0] ; limit due to minimum period restriction (tmin) ;

DEVICE:EP4CE6F17C8 (Cyclone IV E)

; Slow 1200mV 85C Model Fmax Summary ;

+-----------+-----------------+------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------+

; Fmax ; Restricted Fmax ; Clock Name ; Note ;

+-----------+-----------------+------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------+

; 656.6 MHz ; 402.09 MHz ; pl|altpll_component|auto_generated|pll1|clk[0] ; limit due to minimum period restriction (tmin) ;

From this result, it can be seen that only "Cyclone 10 LP"'s DDIO is about half the speed of non-DDIO,

and "Cyclone IV E"'s DDIO and non-DDIO are almost the same speed.

However, for both devices, the 0.5 cycle time is shorter than the Tco of DDIO output.

Therefore, the shortest pulse may disappear, but a long pulse should provide 0.5 cycle time resolution of the edge.

Is there a problem with my research method?

or Is either wrong?